I have switched from the enhanced/WikiEditor toolbar to classic toolbar, i.e. enhanced toolbar currently disabled. Then I realized that the editing window in the "classic" version is also different from the "enhanced" one. The text and spaces are smaller especially to read in the "classic" version than the "enhanced" one. What can be done about the difference in the editing window? --George Ho (talk) 22:42, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

@George Ho: Here's a screenshot of what I see, which is only a difference in the leading (aka line-spacing). I can make them look the same by adding this to my Special:MyPage/global.css: #wpTextbox1 {line-height: 1.1em;}

If you see further differences, it would help if you could provide either screenshots or precise typographical terminology (I think you're referring to the w:en:leading and font-size). Thanks. Quiddity (talk) 17:32, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Oh... I didn't realize the description refers to "(line) leading". (Well, a jargon (no offense); thanks for letting me know, Quiddity.) Yeah, that's exactly what I was referring to by looking at the screenshots. No need to explain any other differences, though I noticed that, by switching to "classic" mode, there are more buttons in enWP than at Meta-wiki. Personally, I don't need a personal script for special treatment, but thanks. If filing a Phabricator task is too soon, maybe I'll wait for the upcoming Community Wishlist Survey. Fair? --George Ho (talk) 20:01, 20 August 2017 (UTC); see below, --05:26, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

This old editing environment is being removed from MediaWiki (maybe later this month). It will shortly stop being supported by the WMF and no longer be in your preferences. If you are using it, then no toolbar will appear (but everything else will be the same). I believe that some editors at the French Wikipedia plan to convert the old toolbar to a user script/gadget. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 00:31, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

@Whatamidoing: If the old toolbar will be gone and... vamoosed, what about the line-spacing that I raised earlier and showed in screenshots? Can it be upgraded all over wikis? BTW, I guess I'll miss that old toolbar. --George Ho (talk) 23:42, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Users will default to the oldest wikitext mw:editor. The line spacing in it can be changed with sitewide CSS, and the change that you made will probably work in the oldest editor, too. Local admins can do this for everyone (if they know how to write CSS, obviously).

There is an effort to replace the 2006 wikitext editor with a user script (probably one that already exists at the French Wikipedia). Assuming that works out, you should be able to switch to the user script and have almost the same thing anyway. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 17:14, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the whole reply, Whatamidoing. If I want the site-wide line-spacing change, must I ask at a Community Wishlist for consensus or file a Phabricator task? Or can the line-spacing be changed right away? --George Ho (talk) 15:56, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Each wiki can adjust this. For example, at the English Wikipedia, you would ask for this to be changed at w:en:WP:VPT. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 17:20, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

The EditorInteractionAnalyser works all right. However, its date range seems to be broken or something, and it has been for months. I sampled some"timeline"pages, but the pages are blank when clicking "timeline". I tried on both IE11 and Chrome, but the issue still persists. I'll ping its operator Σ about this. At first I was going to raise this at enWP, but then I realized that the issue extends to other projects as well. Therefore, I'll raise it here instead. --George Ho (talk) 04:20, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, I do not see any problem. Ruslik (talk) 19:58, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Sorry to use English. Please help translate to your language! Thank you.

In short: starting on 26 September, New Filters for Edit Review (now in Beta) will become standard on Recent Changes. They provide an array of new tools and an improved interface. If you prefer the current page you will be able to opt out. Learn more about the New Filters.

Starting on 26 September, New Filters for Edit Review will become standard on Recent Changes. We have decided to do this release because of a long and successful Beta test phase, positive feedback from various users and positive user testing.

If your community has specific concerns about this deployment or internal discussion, it can request to have the deployment to their wikis delayed to October 1, if they have sensible, consistent with the project, actionable, realistic feedback to oppose (at the development team's appreciation).

You will also be able to opt-out this change in your preferences.

Concerning Watchlists

Starting on September 19, the Beta feature will have a new option. Watchlists will have all filters available now on the Beta Recent Changes improvements.

If you have already activated the Beta feature "New filters for edit review", you have no action to take. If you haven't activated the Beta feature "New filters for edit review" and you want to try the filters on Watchlists, please go to your Beta preferences on September 19.

How to be ready

Please share this announcement!

Do you use Gadgets that change things on your RecentChanges or Watchlist pages, or have you customized them with scripts or CSS? You may have to make some changes to your configuration. Despite the fact that we have tried to take most cases into consideration, some configurations may break. The Beta phase is a great opportunity to have a look at local scripts and gadgets: some of them may be replaced by native features from the Beta feature.

Meta:Administrators/Removal is coming up again on 1 October and if you leave it to yours truly like last time, it will be skipped because checking the fulfillment of the criteria manually is super-tedious. Can someone write a script/tool to check the criteria listed on the page (or point to one that exists already)? --MF-W 23:24, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

https://xtools.wmflabs.org/adminstats could help with this, it's a really nice statics page for admins, which can be filtered by time (e.g. "beginning 1st april, ending 1st october"). But it doesn't count edits to protected pages and also shows users who don't have their admin rights any more, so this isn't replacement for a tool, but only a way to make manual filtering less painuful. EddieGP (talk) 19:20, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

But it doesn't show edit counts at all from a chosen period. It only shows admin actions. Stryn (talk) 19:31, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

My link shouldn't have a trailing slash (removed now). It's right that the tool one doesn't show edit counts, but there are plenty of tools to do that. I just wanted to point out a way to make manually searching for it less painful (using some other tool for edit counts, the one linked to count actions that require sysop rights). As I said, this won't solve the problem, so it's nice that Freddy2001 will develop a tool for it. Thanks for that. EddieGP (talk) 21:45, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

I can look into making XTools' Admin Stats show some of the information you are discussing. Edit count within the period should be easy but I'm not sure how much it will slow it down. I'll have to do some testing. Counting edits to protected pages probably won't happen :/ This mainly because it's not cheap to determine which pages were protected at the time the edits were made. We can however show the number of edits to interface pages (MediaWiki namespace), which are always fully protected. There is a task for this already open at phab:T171996 — MusikAnimaltalk 23:27, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Last week I started writing an SQL query quarry:/query/21657 I plan to finish it (as in to also add editcount, number of edits in particularly, ns8 and CN campaigns log entries). --Base (talk) 21:51, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Can someone add what else shall be counted or discounted? Protected pages edits? It is is a bit tricky to do but I may try (perhaps with a bot rather than SQL). The only thing I do not know how to fetch are Translate related logs, as for translatable page and translation page deletions for example. --Base (talk) 21:56, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

(Edit conflict.)@MF-Warburg: Thanks for bringging this. I'll try to help you in this October inactivity round, but I agree that this is super-tedious. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 21:52, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

@Base: Things like are quite tricky, indeed, since you need to check the protection status of each edited page. The good thing is that we only need to check ten actions per user, and then can skip everything. So if the admin did eg. 10 blocks, nothing else need to be done. And once you found ten protected-page edits, no more are needed. The pathological case would be a sysop that edited lots of pages, but didn't actually use his rights. Platonides (talk) 22:05, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Maybe, given the difficulty of generating the stats and in order to make your fellow bureaucrats life easier we should consider making some amendments to the policy? —MarcoAurelio (talk) 22:10, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks everyone for participating. With Freddy2001 volunteering to create the list by 1 Oct (we have already been in touch), this problem is solved. --MF-W 01:03, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

I was hoping it could be generalized and used in other communities, too. Seems it's going to be Meta-specific. (Well, that's fine too.) — regards, Revi 01:07, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

I guess for such specific requirements, it makes more sense to write a script in each case than some kind of tool. Especially because the data are only required on 2 dates per year. --MF-W 01:26, 26 September 2017 (UTC)